Shooting at another Navy Base, this time Pensacola Naval Air Station. - Page 4
Page 4 of 8 FirstFirst 12345678 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 71

Thread: Shooting at another Navy Base, this time Pensacola Naval Air Station.

  1. #31
    Distinguished Member racer88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    9,900
    Quote Originally Posted by OHEng View Post
    As to the civilian agency that provides the security guards, I have 8 former Navy personnel and 3 former USMC personnel that I served with when on active duty ALL tell me (and they went to work for that company) that is was essentially a "rent-a-cop" type outfit, which is why none of them stayed with them any longer than it took them to line up another job.

    It isn't that our military personnel are not capable of being trained and doing that job - and doing it very well. The issue is that none of them presently ARE trained for it and because of that the bases have agreements with local LE to handle that job. You asked why they responded - well that's why. They are the ones charged with response. Some bases have their own fire department - others rely on the local FD in case of a fire. It's no big deal, it's just a matter of deciding ahead of time does the base want to take on the job with its own personnel or not. In this case, for this situation, the answer is no, and it's been that same way for the 31 years I've been working on or using the facilities at these local bases.
    Well, there's the problem, then. Yeah... that's news to me, and I see that as a HUGE, GLARING issue. That's not to mention the oxymoronic factor. A military base that can't defend itself?? Holy $hit. Things have apparently changed, and for the WORSE. MUCH worse. "Back in my day," the purpose of the military was to wage war... you know... kill people and blow their $hit up. And, now they can't even defend themselves from a SINGLE terrorist??? WTF!! What is their mission now???

    That's not to mention the folly of bases being "gun free zones." Crazy, crazy, crazy.

    I never saw a civilian LEO on base in San Diego. And, I didn't see any at the Air Force Academy when I visited.

    Quote Originally Posted by OHEng View Post
    I haven't called for increasing anything, nor do I plan to. I simply want to know how he laid hands on one. There are reports in the news this morning that he used a Glock 9mm that he purchased locally. HE PURCHASED locally... so if that is true as reported, yeah, I want to know the LGS who sold that weapon and they would never get a bit of my business ever again. I'm not asking the government to restrict anyone even more, I just want to be able to make my own choices accordingly - that's why I want to know. If it turns out he stole it, well nothing I can really do about that.
    It's like asking, "where and how did Joey get that pot / crack / heroine?" News flash: Contraband is EASILY available. And, there's no stopping it in.... here's the KEY... a Free country. He didn't get it at an LGS / FFL, eh? I don't think a foreign national will get past the NICS check, right? He either stole it or, even more likely, bought it "on the street."
    Last edited by racer88; 12-07-2019 at 05:53 PM.
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
    NRA Life Member

    "Dances with guns."

  2. #32
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    FWB
    Posts
    465
    Quote Originally Posted by racer88 View Post
    I've NEVER seen civilians working security at ANY military base. If that's something (very) new, then that $hit's gotta go. Civilians have NO business guarding military bases. That's ****ing crazy. Again.. I've never seen it. The last time I was on a base (Air Force Academy) was maybe 3 years ago. No civvies guarding the gate there. And, we CERTAINLY didn't have civilians working security when I served in the Navy (San Diego).
    They started post 2001 to relieve pressure on troops due to deployments. They're heavily armed, well trained, and allow active military to perform other duties. Besides, if someone runs a gate, there's a new option within 100 yards to stop vehicles. The second guard inside the security house at the gate pushes a button and barriers pop out of the ground.
    I forget which base, not in this area, where a car ran the gate a month or so ago. They hit the button. Car hit the barrier, driver and passenger dead. Seems to work pretty good. At the very least, slows them down so reinforcements can arrive.
    Dems need to quit making chicken salad out of chicken schiff!

  3. #33
    Distinguished Member racer88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    9,900
    Quote Originally Posted by jbs View Post
    They started post 2001 to relieve pressure on troops due to deployments. They're heavily armed, well trained, and allow active military to perform other duties. Besides, if someone runs a gate, there's a new option within 100 yards to stop vehicles. The second guard inside the security house at the gate pushes a button and barriers pop out of the ground.
    I forget which base, not in this area, where a car ran the gate a month or so ago. They hit the button. Car hit the barrier, driver and passenger dead. Seems to work pretty good. At the very least, slows them down so reinforcements can arrive.
    Interesting. But, sad, too. I stand by my opposition to the idea of military personnel being prevented from defending themselves. It's insane and an indefensible policy (pun not intended).

    It reminds me of the disarmed Marines standing guard at the gate to the barracks in Beirut back in 1983. You'd think we had learned our lesson about leaving our bases so vulnerable. Again... WTF???

    I really cannot believe what I'm hearing here. What has become of our military? They seem more concerned about political correctness than military readiness.
    Last edited by racer88; 12-07-2019 at 07:24 PM.
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
    NRA Life Member

    "Dances with guns."

  4. Remove Advertisements
    FloridaConcealedCarry.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #34
    Distinguished Member High Seas Drifter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Beach
    Posts
    9,511
    Quote Originally Posted by jbs View Post
    I forget which base, not in this area, where a car ran the gate a month or so ago. They hit the button. Car hit the barrier, driver and passenger dead. Seems to work pretty good. At the very least, slows them down so reinforcements can arrive.
    https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/y...ir-force-base/

    ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE, Ga. — Authorities say a man drove through a gate at Robins Air Force Base and collided with a security barrier, killing himself and two passengers.

    The incident occurred Friday night after the vehicle approached the Russell Parkway gate and refused to stop.

    News outlets report the car then crashed through the gate, prompting guards to activate a security barrier to keep the vehicle from advancing. The speeding vehicle then hit the barrier.




    -on Tapatalk
    • "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." -The Dalai Lama

  6. #35
    Distinguished Member racer88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    9,900
    Quote Originally Posted by High Seas Drifter View Post
    https://www.airforcetimes.com/news/y...ir-force-base/

    ROBINS AIR FORCE BASE, Ga. — Authorities say a man drove through a gate at Robins Air Force Base and collided with a security barrier, killing himself and two passengers.

    The incident occurred Friday night after the vehicle approached the Russell Parkway gate and refused to stop.

    News outlets report the car then crashed through the gate, prompting guards to activate a security barrier to keep the vehicle from advancing. The speeding vehicle then hit the barrier.

    Would love to see video of that!
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
    NRA Life Member

    "Dances with guns."

  7. #36
    Distinguished Member High Seas Drifter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    The Beach
    Posts
    9,511
    Me, too, but I'm not finding any!

    -on Tapatalk
    • "If someone has a gun and is trying to kill you, it would be reasonable to shoot back with your own gun." -The Dalai Lama

  8. #37
    Distinguished Member racer88's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    9,900
    Quote Originally Posted by OHEng View Post
    It's the same company some of my friends worked for (see previous post). They are not MPs, they are not billeted here on military orders with an appropriate NEC in the LE/Security/MP line of work. They are a civilian contractor that provides basic security and that's all they are contracted to do. They can write you a speeding ticket if you blast over that 35mph limit on base, but they aren't tactically trained for heavy duty lifting such as taking down a Saudi flight student turned terrorist.

    I've nothing against that company, I'm simply telling you as a fact that they are not trained or equipped to handle that kind of situation. Oh, they will be involved, but it will be in securing the access to the base and directing traffic. The local LEA has trained and equipped people and they have an agreement with the base to provide those services if needed.

    In years past, I've seen military people dedicated to the task of protecting bases and they indeed did a good job. I remember being stationed at NAS Coronado and the Marines who guarded that base were definitely capable of putting a hurting on anything in or around that base. But this ain't them. Because of several years of downsizing, consolidating, and budget cuts, it ain't your father's gate security we're talking about.

    There is a Public Affairs Office on that base, I'm sure you could contact them and ask them why the local LEA responded and no base/military personnel did.
    That's just so sad. So, the civilians aren't even cops? They're just a private security firm? Like "Paul Blart?"

    I'm glad you weren't referring to our troops as "rent-a-cops." I assumed (for good reason) that the folks guarding the gate of a MILITARY base were... MILITARY personnel. That was always my experience. I'm still thinking, "WTF??"
    Last edited by racer88; 12-07-2019 at 07:31 PM.
    NRA Certified Pistol Instructor
    NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
    NRA Life Member

    "Dances with guns."

  9. #38
    Super Moderator
    BeerHunter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    PBC
    Posts
    25,295
    Quote Originally Posted by racer88 View Post
    That's just so sad. So, the civilians aren't even cops? They're just a private security firm? Like "Paul Blart?"

    I'm glad you weren't referring to our troops as "rent-a-cops." I assumed (for good reason) that the folks guarding the gate of a MILITARY base were... MILITARY personnel. That was always my experience. I'm still thinking, "WTF??"
    For over two decades of my 30+ years at NAS Patuxent River (and probably that whole time but I just can't remember way back to when I started), we had U.S. Navy Gate Guards supplemented by DoD Civilian Police Officers, but NEVER contract security guards. Those Navy/DoD LEOs drilled regularly in countertactics for all sorts of threats, including counter-terrorism threats. After 9-11, the base installed those rapid response barriers to take out gate crashers. Always wondered what those barriers would do and finally found out after that Robins AFB incident.
    Last edited by BeerHunter; 12-07-2019 at 09:04 PM.
    -BH

    Member: Florida Carry, COTEP 766, SAF, GOA, NRA Endowment Life
    FFL 03, NRA CRSO & CI: P-R-S-PPITH
    Former USAF NCO 1980-1984, DoD 1987-Present
    Please consider joining NRA at www.nra.org and Florida Carry at www.floridacarry.org

    “The greatest danger to American freedom is a government that ignores the Constitution.”
    -- Thomas Jefferson, Third President of the United States

    "Those who 'abjure' violence can only do so because others are commuting violence on their behalf."
    -- George Orwell


    "The ultimate result of shielding men from folly is to fill the world with fools."
    -- Herbert Spencer

  10. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Location
    Homosassa
    Posts
    90
    Quote Originally Posted by racer88 View Post
    Interesting. But, sad, too. I stand by my opposition to the idea of military personnel being prevented from defending themselves. It's insane and an indefensible policy (pun not intended).

    It reminds me of the disarmed Marines standing guard at the gate to the barracks in Beirut back in 1983. You'd think we had learned our lesson about leaving our bases so vulnerable. Again... WTF???

    I really cannot believe what I'm hearing here. What has become of our military? They seem more concerned about political correctness than military readiness.
    Amen!

  11. #40
    Distinguished Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Location
    Pensacola
    Posts
    3,371
    I get the surprise and frustration about this base security thing. I really do.

    It was never my intent to disparage ANY military force or DoD cops or anyone else... I'm simply reporting what I know. In the last few years of my active duty time (literally last century) I can't count the number of meetings I had to sit through where a lot of this kind of stuff got started. It has to do with BRAC (Base Realignment and Consolidation if I remember it correctly). The military was under a lot of pressure to do more with less, and as you can well imagine at the start of it there was some amount of bloat and excess which rightfully should have been done away with. Examples are 30 installations across the country each with their own accounting, clerks, etc. and many of those type situations could be served with one or two central accounting offices that each served some of the installations. That kind of "fat" was first to go.

    Then when it came to base closures and moving commands from A to B, you're into very heavy politics there because Congress members don't take it well when a federal facility in their area gets closed (and all the civilian jobs vanish or go with it). As you would well imagine, this is the kind of thing that is fought tooth and nail, and there are lots of metrics involved that might not immediately jump to mind that come into play. One example is recent construction on the base; if nothing new has been built or improved, that counts against you in the scoring for which base(s) ought to go, so you can be sure every dollar that can be spent on improving an old building or revamping some office space is a top priority. Size of base compared to number of base it serves; ability to expand if necessary; are there other facilities on the base (such as a National Cemetery that's on NAS Pensacola); any historic sites (Fort Barrancas, also on NAS Pensacola), and the list goes on.

    So what happens is every few years when this stuff comes up, about a year in advance they form a team that reviews each and every line item and maximizes the scores. Even the local community has a role to play in this. So when you consider WHY a local agency might have primary responsibility for such an important job as critical emergency response, a piece of that puzzle likely came about as a way to best position the base to NOT get closed.

    Now speaking personally as a Sailor and as a matter of my own opinion, I believe we learned every thing we needed to know not in kindergarten but at Pearl Harbor 12/7/41. That lesson is simple - NEVER trust anyone, and the only one you can rely on for your own defense is YOU, whether you be an individual or a whole Navy. I don't care how much it cost, I don't give a flying rat's patoot about training pipeline times or anything else, but EVERYone that wears a uniform ought to have training in defending their base. Just like on a ship, it should be a matter of daily routine to practice those skills. The local SO can show up if they want, but they'd be climbing over several dozen Sailors and Marines who likely already would have had the Saudi 2nd LT in question well into the Swiss cheese category. But that's just me... and it's not like any of the powers that be would listen to what I have to say. I'm sure there's some money reason why that couldn't be, but the one thing I learned about money in a government agency the size of the Nav is that when the SHTF, money can flow like water from a NYC fire hydrant in July. Unfortunately, it takes S hitting the F for those waterways to open up.

    Back to the subject of the gun for a second. The Daily Mail is reporting tonight that the weapon was a Glock 45, and it was purchased at a LGS. According to their article, there is some sort of exception to the rule IF the visiting national has a hunting license, and apparently this guy had one. I admit I don't know what laws regarding what might allow a visiting Saudi flight student to be able to purchase a firearm, but I'm sure it's gonna be common knowledge around LGSs and local ranges right quick!
    A man with two watches never really knows what time it is.
    M. Twain


    I think the feminists probably need some serious man in their lives.
    Delores O'Riodan

Sposors

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •